Centre d'Information et de documentation du CRA Rhône-Alpes
CRA
Informations pratiques
-
Adresse
Centre d'information et de documentation
du CRA Rhône-Alpes
Centre Hospitalier le Vinatier
bât 211
95, Bd Pinel
69678 Bron CedexHoraires
Lundi au Vendredi
9h00-12h00 13h30-16h00Contact
Tél: +33(0)4 37 91 54 65
Mail
Fax: +33(0)4 37 91 54 37
-
Résultat de la recherche
1 recherche sur le mot-clé 'Child-psychiatric-diagnosis cultural-differences universalist-approach relativistic-approach'
Affiner la recherche Générer le flux rss de la recherche
Partager le résultat de cette recherche Faire une suggestion
Psychiatric diagnosis – is it universal or relative to culture? / Glorisa CANINO in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49-3 (March 2008)
[article]
Titre : Psychiatric diagnosis – is it universal or relative to culture? Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Glorisa CANINO, Auteur ; Margenta ALEGRIA, Auteur Année de publication : 2008 Article en page(s) : p.237-250 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : Child-psychiatric-diagnosis cultural-differences universalist-approach relativistic-approach Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background: There is little consensus on the extent to which psychiatric disorders or syndromes are universal or the extent to which they differ on their core definitions and constellation of symptoms as a result of cultural or contextual factors. This controversy continues due to the lack of biological markers, imprecise measurement and the lack of a gold standard for validating most psychiatric conditions.
Method: Empirical studies were used to present evidence in favor of or against a universalist or relativistic view of child psychiatric disorders using a model developed by Robins and Guze to determine the validity of psychiatric disorders.
Results: The prevalence of some of the most common specific disorders and syndromes as well as its risk and protective factors vary across cultures, yet comorbid patterns and response to treatments vary little across cultures. Cross-cultural longitudinal data on outcomes is equivocal.
Conclusions: The cross-cultural validity of child disorders may vary drastically depending on the disorder, but empirical evidence that attests for the cross-cultural validity of diagnostic criteria for each child disorder is lacking. There is a need for studies that investigate the extent to which gene–environment interactions are related to specific disorders across cultures. Clinicians are urged to consider culture and context in determining the way in which children's psychopathology may be manifested independent of their views. Recommendations for the upcoming classificatory system are provided so that practical or theoretical considerations are addressed about how culture and ethnic issues affect the assessment or treatment of specific disorders in children.En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01854.x Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=336
in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 49-3 (March 2008) . - p.237-250[article] Psychiatric diagnosis – is it universal or relative to culture? [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Glorisa CANINO, Auteur ; Margenta ALEGRIA, Auteur . - 2008 . - p.237-250.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 49-3 (March 2008) . - p.237-250
Mots-clés : Child-psychiatric-diagnosis cultural-differences universalist-approach relativistic-approach Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background: There is little consensus on the extent to which psychiatric disorders or syndromes are universal or the extent to which they differ on their core definitions and constellation of symptoms as a result of cultural or contextual factors. This controversy continues due to the lack of biological markers, imprecise measurement and the lack of a gold standard for validating most psychiatric conditions.
Method: Empirical studies were used to present evidence in favor of or against a universalist or relativistic view of child psychiatric disorders using a model developed by Robins and Guze to determine the validity of psychiatric disorders.
Results: The prevalence of some of the most common specific disorders and syndromes as well as its risk and protective factors vary across cultures, yet comorbid patterns and response to treatments vary little across cultures. Cross-cultural longitudinal data on outcomes is equivocal.
Conclusions: The cross-cultural validity of child disorders may vary drastically depending on the disorder, but empirical evidence that attests for the cross-cultural validity of diagnostic criteria for each child disorder is lacking. There is a need for studies that investigate the extent to which gene–environment interactions are related to specific disorders across cultures. Clinicians are urged to consider culture and context in determining the way in which children's psychopathology may be manifested independent of their views. Recommendations for the upcoming classificatory system are provided so that practical or theoretical considerations are addressed about how culture and ethnic issues affect the assessment or treatment of specific disorders in children.En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01854.x Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=336